Michael Kidd-Gilchrist Can’t Shoot. Who Cares?

Cavs:the Blog’s draft profiles on Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Harrison Barnes and Jeremy Lamb arrived in December, January and February. Things change fast with teenaged basketball players though, so time has come to freshen up our thoughts a bit.

Today, I’ll re-visit MKG. I liked him in December and still do today. There exists however, a sentiment that his current inability to shoot makes him unworthy of the fourth pick, let alone second. I’ll estimate that 25% of Cavs fans do not consider MKG as a top-five pick. For what it’s worth, a poll on NBAdraft.net basically falls at 50 – 50 with regards to “MKG vs Barnes”. My understanding of the rationale is that the UK freshman star does not possess the offensive chops to warrant such a high rating. I disagree, and will offer a few points on why.

He played well on offense this year

On a balanced offensive team where six players scored between 10 and 14 points per game, MKG finished fourth in scoring, including a respectable 112 offensive rating on 21.4 usage. His true shooting percentage of 57% derived through beastly finishing in transition, off-cuts and through offensive rebounding. With developing ball-handling ability he attacks the basket, earning five free throw attempts per game; he hit 75%.

Frequently, I see an excuse offered up on behalf of Harrison Barnes, that the NBA game will really open things up for him. The same applies to MKG. In addition to the NCAA three-point line falling one-yard nearer the basket than the NBA distance, Kentucky’s starting line-up featured four non-shooters. Finding open lanes for a driving, cutting slasher will be easier in the better-spaced pro-game.

He will be one of the NBA’s best wing defenders

Within five years, maybe THE best. I don’t know how people can ignore this. Capable of guarding at least three positions and widely regarded as lock-down, his defense presents a completely elite NBA skill. He turns nineteen in September and should be fighting for a place on NBA all-defense teams for over a decade.

These players are almost identically sized to MKG with one distinction. At 3 and 1.5 years younger, respectively, he already sports an extra 10 – 15 pounds of muscle. Defensively, he could be peak-level-Ron Artest, minus the crazy.

His floor is about as high as anyone in the draft

Draftexpress.com listed MKG’s “worst-case” as Gerald Wallace; a player who over the last seven seasons registered per-36 minute averages of 17 points on 56.5% true shooting with 7.4 rebounds per game. Basically one point every two minutes with above average efficiency, while making one all-defense team. That’s “WORST CASE” according to one reputable source; that rating is also known as “bust-proof” according to me.

He can learn to shoot

As a side note on Wallace, during his freshman year at Alabama he converted 18% of his three-point attempts, despite the NCAA line at a one-foot shorter distance than it is today. Over the last six years in the NBA, he made 34% from long distance.

By all accounts, MKG is one of this draft’s hardest working players, a man with an unquenching desire to improve. I find it unlikely that his three point shooting will not improve to respectable levels. A quick search reveals several other small forwards besides Wallace to improve their shooting.

Kawhi Leonard knocked-down 20% his freshman year, 29% his sophomore year, and in his first season working in the Spurs system – 38%! With hard work, great coaching and a well-oiled system, he exhibited an overnight transformation.

Richard Jefferson shot well in college, but his first five NBA seasons featured 32% three-point shooting, before improving to an average of 39% over the last six seasons.

The following players all played NCAA-ball before the three-point line extended to 20’ – 9”:

Paul Pierce made 30% his freshman year at Kansas

Danny Green hit 32% his first two NCAA seasons and is now a 42% NBA three-point shooter

Andre Iguodala bricked 21% his freshman year, before improving to 33% in the NBA, including a career-best 39% last season.

Jared Dudley started at 31% three-point shooting his freshman season, improved every year thereafter, and now strokes 40+% in the pros.

Shooting isn’t the most revered trait for an NBA Small Forward

Without comparing MKG to several of the players included; eight small forwards made an all-NBA team in the last ten years. Their average three-point shooting percentage in that season was 34.7%, more than one-percent lower than NBA average shooting. As many three-point shooting specialists rated as all-NBA (Peja Stojakovic) as players noted for their stout defense (Ron Artest).

Summary

Once upon a time, Ron Artest was the second-leading scorer on a 60-win team, the lock-down wing defender on a top-3 NBA defense. Early in his age 25 season, his up-and-coming team hit their stride, rolling the defending NBA champs by 15 on their own court. Then he punched a fan and started the brawl that crippled a franchise.

I think Michael Kidd-Gilchrist hits all those high notes, except his story ends without a riot, and instead finishes with a decade-long run of title contention.

Kevin,
This draft is really going to be interesting to see unfold. Grant is really going to be tested.

Because of the assets the Cavs hold, they can pretty much get whatever they want, depending on how much of the future they are willing to mortgage. If MKG is the small forward they prefer, they will be compelled, I believe, to trade up to number two. On top of that, they have to secure a truly viable shooting guard which, in my mind, means they have to find a way to get another pick in the 10-15 range.

As patient and process oriented as Grant is, I believe that Gilbert will give the green light to be as aggressive as needed to take major steps to get over the hump this year. I am referring to taking on the contract(s) of Okafor and/or Ariza in exchange, in part, for the number 10 pick. The talent is there in this draft, but it is going to take alot of skill, courage, and Gilberts backing.

I am also a big MKG fan. If they draft him and keep Gee they will have a very good pair of wing defenders. That would be enough to wear out any team featuring a star wing and keep up with a team having two great wings. Add in TT and Andy’s solid defense and energy and the Cavs would have a really good defensive team. As far as outside shooting, having a great shooter at PG balances that part of the ledger better than most teams. If they keep Boobie and draft another shooter like Jenkins or Doron Lamb they would have a balanced mix of talents. Interestingly, another doable way of building a similar team is to draft Bealor Jeremy Lamb and Jeff Taylor.

I wouldn’t mind id the Cavs traded up for #2 and took on a contract like Diop’s. I think Gilchrist is worth it. If they made a similar deal with NOLA for Okafor and/or Ariza it would also be a great move but might cost them MKG.

One important thing to keep in mind about such a salary dump trade is that it cannot happen officially now. At best it is a draft day announced potential trade that couldn’t be officially completed until the new salary CAP was in place. At this moment the official CAP situations of teams is their 2011-12 final roster position. The Cavs and most other teams will not have sufficient CAP space until both the FA’s are set free on July 1, and the new CAP is in place around July 10. That is my best understanding of the CAP rules, taken from several good sources, and might not be 100% accurate.

I am also a big MKG fan. If they draft him and keep Gee they will have a very good pair of wing defenders. That would be enough to wear out any team featuring a star wing and keep up with a team having two great wings. Add in TT and Andy’s solid defense and energy and the Cavs would have a really good defensive team. As far as outside shooting, having a great shooter at PG balances that part of the ledger better than most teams. If they keep Boobie and draft another shooter like Jenkins or Doron Lamb they would have a balanced mix of talents. Interestingly, another doable way of building a similar team is to draft Bealor Jeremy Lamb and Jeff Taylor.

I wouldn’t mind id the Cavs traded up for #2 and took on a contract like Diop’s. I think Gilchrist is worth it. If they made a similar deal with NOLA for Okafor and/or Ariza it would also be a great move but might cost them MKG.

This applies to James and JAG, but Cleveland has tons of options. It’s a testament to the many “little” moves the team has made in the last two years and is exciting. Now Grant and company just need to turn assets / cap flexibility into players.

One important thing to keep in mind about such a salary dump trade is that it cannot happen officially now. At best it is a draft day announced potential trade that couldn’t be officially completed until the new salary CAP was in place. At this moment the official CAP situations of teams is their 2011-12 final roster position. The Cavs and most other teams will not have sufficient CAP space until both the FA’s are set free on July 1, and the new CAP is in place around July 10. That is my best understanding of the CAP rules, taken from several good sources, and might not be 100% accurate

JAG,
They could still get MKG(using the New Orleans scenario), if the Cavs were willing to give up the infamous Sacramento future number 1 pick. This is where Grants “flexibility” comments come into play. I guess what I am saying is even if they could get MKG, the Cavs still have the available assets to get a SG i.e. Lamb, Ross etc between 10 and 15. Why put it off, if the talent is available and worth it. Notice that I do not have the Cavs giving up the 24 pick. The Okafor scenario is a two year financial hit, but he is a veteran at a position(center) that supplements Verajo which we all know is mandatory.

The reason for the trade delay would be that most teams including the Cavs do not officially have enough salary space until the contracts officially expire from last year’s team and a new CAP is in place for next year.

I am one of the people who has been skeptical of MKG. To be clear, though, I think the Cavs should definitely take him at 4 if he is there. My main point is that if they don’t get MKG they will be OK. When the lottery first happened, this blog took the extreme position that picking 4 was somehow a disaster and that he Cavs should consider trading multiple first rounders to get into the 2 hole. This I disagree with. I think MKG has enough questions that he is not worth it.

@danquarterly,
Not sure EXACTLY where I stand on Lamb. In the next week-ish, I’ll post a compelling argument one way or another. When I watched him, UConn was going through an especially dysfunctional part of the season. I know a certain cross section of Cavs fans really like him, so the blog will give him a second chance.

When Lamb was asked what he knew about the Trail Blazers organization, he allegedly struggled to name LaMarcus Aldridge, and then with some prompting said there’s also “that light-skinned dude.” Who turned out to be Nic Batum.

Here’s why we should not take MKG even if he is there. The cavs right now Have TT who can’t shoot at all. Gee who can’t shoot that well. And AV who can’t shoot. If they draft MKG they will trot out a lineup with one good shooter, one semi competent shooter and 3 non-shooters. Not even chris paul could get those guys open shots. Teams will go box and 1 on kyrie and if we draft or sign a competent 2 then they will triangle and 2 us. A great NBA team needs 2 great shooters and 2 good shooters. A good NBA team can get away with 3 good shooters. Bottom line is this team would not be able to score. If we had Jameson and Z, like front court with KI then sure MKG would be a dream pick. The NBA is a chemistry driven league and there will be no chemistry on a team that can’t play 15 ft from the basket

Rodney Mac,
I like Gee, but almost certainly wouldn’t make draft decisions based on him. Also, I love Varejao, but ultimately drafting 19 year old MKG isn’t about the next 3 years. There will be plenty of opportunity to put shooters around Kyrie, Tristan and MKG; if the Cavs choose to go that route.

Also I’m willing to wager that Beal or MKG will be there at 4. And I wouldn’t be suprised to Beal slide out of the top 5. Thomas Robinson wis the second best player in the draft followed by MKG and Barnes

The thing I find interesting is that many Cavs fans think Gee cannot shoot the three and would prefer a “better” shooter like Beal or Barnes. They are only potentially better shooters whose 3 Pt shooting numbers in college are almost identical to what Gee has done for his NBA career. Those college numbers are from a closer distance.

Again, you compare him to a bunchif people who were not drafted in the top 4 (please spare me the re-due on history) and those guys are barely all-stars. Furthermore, his remarkably high percentage in finishing at the hoop will most certainly go down cuz guess what? There are more tall and athletic players that defend the hoop in the NBA. In fact, your assertion that he will be able to drive easier in the NBA is negated also by the fact that he will be guarded by guys as athletic as him. You make a TON of assumptions on this guy. I pray we do the rumored Portland deal and get Barnes and the Lamb or PJ3 or something like that. 2 right now starters whose ceilings are arguably just as high as MKG’s. Two is better than one…

Kj,
I still don’t understand your assertion that comparing a potential top 4 pick to previous non-top 4 picks somehow proves that person unworthy of a high selection. If I compare someone to prior 57th pick Manu Ginobli, does that mean the Cavs need to wait to the 2nd round to find a similar player? Are the Cavs only supposed to draft players that compare to previous top 5 picks? You argument seems based on some weird idea that draft day is a perfect representation of a player’s worth for the rest of time.

Also, my main comparison for MKG was Ron Artest. At the time of the brawl, he was 25, an all-star, defending NBA DPOY, averaging 25 points a game early in 2005…of course, he was the 16th pick, so I guess the Cavs need to trade down and look for a DPOY that scores 20 per game.

I agree but I’m pointing out that picking MKG means that we will not improve drastically this year. Which could be a good thing but demands patience. He isn’t as consensus 2nd best as you all make him out to be. I know at least one cavs exec that honor belongs to Robinson by alot.

Rodney Mac,
Drafting MKG along with contributors at 24, 33 or 34 combined with a healthy Andy and improved Kyrie and TT will result in improvements next year. Regardless, I think we all agree that this draft isn’t about next year.

Also, I didn’t call MKG the consensus 2nd best. I just called him really good.

To be honest, if Kyrie and Andy stay healthy next year, I think we will have a really hard time NOT making the playoffs. Their pick and roll game was among the best in the league. Assuming TT can improve at least a tiny bit, and that we get anything out of our draft (wings in all likely-hood) we will be better then we were when Andy went out and that was right in the playoff picture.

I want MKG because we need defensive wings to have any shot at winning a championship ever. If he can have Artest-like impact on the defensive end, even if he couldn’t shoot at all, he would be worth the number 4. Guys his age are rarely dedicated and talented at the defensive end. This guy could be an absolute beast.

If he can develop a respectable 3 point shot (33-34%) he’s definitely worth the 4th overall pick and can be Kyrie’s Robin. Under this scenario, we would need a good shot creater at SG and a decently skilled offensive big man. If Robinson or Drummond go in the top 3, we’ll be left with a really good wing at #4.

Rodney Mac, If we make any decision in this draft based on our starting 5 this year, I will be sorely dissappointed in grant. Everyone talks about getting over the “hump”. what is the hump? Simply making the playoffs? News flash, Kyrie is a really special player and in the weak east will be making the playoffs with a below average team, nevermind one featuring Andy, TT, Gee, And a bunch of 1st round picks. Who cares about being an 8 seed. My Hump is to be a legitimate contender again.

If MKG helps us there more than other prospects, we gotta take him. Who cares if Gee plays the same position, on a contending team Gee would be a terrible starter anyways. Who cares if maybe we start Gee at the 2 (unlikely) next year to have our best line-up talent wise out on the floor, and they can’t shoot. Then start boobie gibson or free agent x or pick 24. I don’t care. We’re going to need shooters eventually, to be sure, but we have plenty of ways to acquire them. If MKG is the best player at 4, you got to take them. We’re not missing that one crucial shooter to become a contender, we’re missing 3 spots on the roster, and MKG fills one of them.

I am relieved MKG at least hits 75% from the line. Not everybody can learn to shoot, but the fact he was consistent from the line seems to show the muscle memory is available to him, and the form can be learned. Still no guarantee he ever puts it together, but its promising to his potential jump shooting ability. As for taking barnes over him, you can’t learn elite athleticism and you can’t force the will to defend at an elite level. Barnes is a fine 2nd or 3rd fiddle on offense, and ok on defense, but MKG will at least be elite at one important skill set for sure, while Barnes is only elite at long 2’s, the worst shot selection in basketball.

“MKG (Michael Kidd-Gilchrist)is a good defensive player, but he isn’t as good as people believe. Having (Anthony) Davis camped around the rim allowed players to play defense in a way which minimized their weaknesses,” the scout said. More? “The threat of the lob made (Marquis) Teague out to be a better point guard than he really is,” the scout said. But wait. There’s more. ‘In reality, the Kentucky system is smoke and mirrors. I remember being out in Vegas for a Summer League and I was sitting and watching games with a long-time Director of Scouting in the league. He said he was stunned at how unprepared Kentucky players were for the NBA, and he had drafted one of them,’ the scout said.”

Don’t know if I buy all of this, but it’s an interesting counterpoint.

As for Taking on $30 million in salary over the next two years in order to get the #10 pick, I don’t see it happening. Gilbert’s not afraid to spend money, but he’s not an idiot, either.

Basically agree with Hot Sauce on this — many of us “MKG haters” think he’d be a solid pick at 4; we’re just not sold on him as head and shoulders above the other options. I think we’re pushing back against the overwhelming MKG love that seems to mainly be coming from folks who like his reputed personality, which may be all well and good, but as fans isn’t something we really know much about.

Kevin, your piece is obviously a welcome exception to that, as it talks about him on the court. Like the other players there are strengths and weaknesses to his game. I agree with you that his strength is probably the most sure thing of the bunch — there seems little chance he won’t be at least a substantially above average defender. In terms of how much you have to pay on the free agent market, or how high a pick you need in another year to try and get a lock-down defender, that’s always going to be below what you need to get a complete offensive player. Is Beal, Barnes or someone else going to be that type of complete player? That seems up for debate. I see Rodney Mac’s concern — not so much about next year, but down the road if we don’t end up with quite as high picks in coming years and can’t get another player that can be a primary scoring option besides Kyrie. That would be problem. I think you take a hard look at the options you have at 4 and think about whether they can be that guy. But I certainly won’t be upset if MKG is there at 4 and they think he has the most promise.

I don’t doubt it Kevin, just offering a counterpoint. I’m really torn at #4. I think best case for MKG: A lighter Shawn Marion. The player he most reminds me of: Stacey Augmon. I’m kind of in your boat in that I think MKG could be a really good player if he learns to shoot. Brad Beal could be our James Harden. Thomas Robinson could be our Chris Bosh. And Andre Drummond could be our Dwight Howard or our Yinka Dare. Don’t quite know who to take there, but they all have their issues.

Yes, Kevin I expect my FO to draft correctly! Is that outrageous to you? I expect my FO to get maximum value for each pick! NO ONE EVER would’ve made Artest the #2 pick, re-draft or no. Yet that’s who you think MKG will be. Hopefully. NOT GOOD ENOUGH for the #2 pick. I really don’t understand what yr not getting here. And you addressed none of the other flaws in yr argument and MKG’s game. I forgot one, too; many point to his FT% as “proof” that he can be a good shooter but if you watch his recent workout videos his hitch OBVIOUSLY is a problem as he shoots as he’s coming down off of his jump. Which means it’s chance of being blocked is pretty great. Shooting a FT takes out that possibility. So, he could be a decent FT and still be a terrible jumpshooter, yeah?

Also, when hoop dog posted that criticism of his defense you mention MKG’s drew raves before he played w/Davis. Ya mean, when he was in HIGH SCHOOL? Really? We should draft him as a lock-down defender based on his HS defensive exploits? Come on…

Kj,
I expect the front office to draft correctly, too. I don’t know where you think I said otherwise. I don’t know what the fact that at least 5 GMs missed on Iguodala, 10 missed on Artest and 20 missed on Gerald Wallace has anything to do with me not wanting the Cavs to draft poorly. I hope they don’t miss on one of those guys.

I asked you this in a previous thread. What do you rate as the “ceiling” and “floor” of the players that you like? I say “prime Ron Artest” and “gerald Wallace” for MKG.

One of the comments that I keep seeing is that MKG has one of the “highest floors” of any draft prospect — that his combination of work ethic and athleticism all but guarantee that he will be a productive player in the NBA. I’d be happy to believe that’s true but, just as a cautionary tale, here’s MKG compared to another player who was widely praised for his work ethic, athleticism, and focus.

NickS,
A few thoughts on Jeff Green. he didn’t have a position. Heading into his junior year, draft express called him a “marginal” defender. From his freshman year, through his junior year, his production didn’t improve at all. You could compare his junior year stats with MKG’s freshman year and it looks the same. Obviously, it’s possible that MKG shows no improvement in the next two years, but certainly hard working 18 year olds should be improved players by age 20.

KJ, the point is he had a reputation as a great defender dating back to before he played with Anthony Davis. Not just at his high school, but also in the AAU circuit and the USA basketball U18 team — playing and practicing against top-tier talent in his age group. No, it’s isn’t a perfect indicator of future success, but someone with great physical tools who actually UTILIZES them to defend intelligently and physically (compared to so many who have the ~*potential*~ to be great defenders but never get there), especially at that age, is not something you often come by.

And furthermore, a mentally stable, intelligent, and selfless player with Ron Artest’s physical gifts is an incredible player, and well worth the 2nd pick in many different drafts.

Here’s a question… Philedelphia’s supposedly interested in trading up to get Drummond. Would you take the #15, Evan Turner, and a future #1 (or maybe the right to flip spots) for the 4th pick? Evan Turner would be an ideal player for the Cavs: two Guard who can play backup up point guard… This might be too far down to go in this draft. Might have to take some kind of three way deal with one or both of Portland’s picks to make this work.

Truthfully I think the top 3 end up being Davis, Robinson, and Drummond, in some order (though I think Washington trades down because they don’t want to take on another project like Drummond). Someone will trade up for Drummond because you can’t teach that kind of size and agility. If Washington takes MKG, do we trade out of the 4th spot?

NickS, Green was a much different prospect than MKG is. He was more of a combo forward that had some good skills but would have been either a slow SF or small PF (eerily similar to Derrick Williams). I know DraftExpress thought he was a late lottery/mid 1st round talent, unlike MKG, who is top 4. MKG has the athleticism to be a good SF and from everything I’ve gathered about both players, has a much better work ethic.

Hoops, personally I wouldn’t make that trade, although I’m an admitted huge fan of Beal. The NBA is a star-driven league, and if you can get another star to pair with Irving, the Cavs become contenders for a decade. If you look at teams like Indiana and Philly, they have good, deep talent but no elite talent to take them over the top. A couple All-Stars surrounded by the right complementary pieces (Andy, TT, #24th pick, Sacramento pick) seems to be the tried-and-true method, so I would prefer that.

Dallas had two stars (Dirk and Terry) plus quality pieces (Chandler, Marion, Barea). The Spurs have Parker and Ginobili plus Duncan, Leonard, etc. The Celtics have Rondo and KG plus Pierce, Allen, Bass. The Bulls have Rose and Deng plus Boozer, Noah, and Hamilton. The Cavs need to find their Robin this year and worry about acquiring their other key pieces later.

Alex, Terry is no star, nor is Deng. You kind of fight yourself there by including those two teams.

As far as Turner and 15 for 4, I think I’m for it, but who knows. I doubt Philly would make that trade as they have a lot invested in turner still. HoopsDogg, if Drummond goes tope 3 I will be stoked and relived he’s not on the Cavs. The combine is so overrated, production beats measurements 99 times out of 100.

and ya, its pretty lame to compare offensive stats between players at 2 years experience apart, especially when one is known as defensively dominant and the other has defense as an afterthought. Defense doesn’t show up on stats that well. You can be a great defender without getting a lot of blocks and steals.

I find it interesting how MKG’s lack of a great 3 pt shot has evolved into his being perceived as an offensive liability by many fans. A team of great shooters will often have a problem because they lack someone who can slash and create his own shot. I’m thinking MKG has the ability to add that component and when coupled with his hustle and rebounding, would make him another offensive asset. It’s all about balancing the floor with players whose assets make up for the flaws other players have. Shooters, slashers, rebounders and distributors all have value on the offensive end of the court. Having the right balance of all of those things are what a coach looks for when mixing in his rotations.

Matt: While they may not be considered typical “stars”, Terry sure played like one during their championship run (18 ppg on 44% from 3) and Deng is an All-Star. If MKG is a borderline All-Star like Deng or Terry (or a more accurate comparison- Iguodala), that could be good enough to be a second option on a title contender. I just think if the front office believes he can be the 2nd best player on a title team, they should take him over a 3rd and 4th option. Between 2003 and 2010, we could never find that #2 guy to put us over the top, even when we acquired plenty of 3rd, 4th, and 5th option players.

I agree that we can’t afford not to consider the complete package of skills that each prospect offers. Especially defense, which often doesn’t get treated with the importance it deserves as half the game. And I do think MKG is a very nice prospect, with potential to contribute on both ends.

But people are right to be concerned about his shooting. That’s not just a concern about his individual game, but about the team’s ability to run a good offense. 3-point shooters don’t just produce points efficiently, they also force the defense to spread out to the perimeter, which opens up space inside for slashers and post players. And 3-point shooting has steadily grown in importance since the introduction of the three-point line, as teams and players slowly learned to utilize the shot and embraced it for its higher efficiency and tactical advantages. (Which is why comparisons with older players don’t quite do the problem justice: shooting is more necessary today–and will be even more so by 2016–than it was in 2005.)

In 2012, a lineup with 4 shooters is the offensive ideal (achieved by some teams, like the 2009 Magic). With 3, a talented lineup can still be very effective. A lineup with only 2 outside shooters is inherently limited. We’ve seen Miami, with their unmatchable talent, struggle to score in the halfcourt and resort to unconventional lineups because of this problem. Their overwhelming talent allows them to win, but we’ve seen LeBron win even more with inferior yet complementary players. Are Kyrie and MKG going to be as good as LeBron and Wade? If not, I think Kyrie is going to need an effective offensive system that maximizes his and his teammates’ abilities in order to contend for a title. And that depends on shooters.

Building around Kyrie, MKG, and TT means our best lineups will have a max of two shooters on the floor (unless our center of the future is the next Channing Frye, and who wants that?). That’s a definite handicap. Can MKG’s defense and overall talent superiority overcome that? Maybe. Can he develop a decent outside shot, or can Tristan? Possibly. But looking at his shot, and TT’s percentages, the chances look very slim to me.

(Whether we should pencil in TT as our ‘PF of the future’ is a different issue which I feel conflicted about. But given our hopes for him, it wouldn’t seem wise to count on finding a different ‘PF of the future’ who can shoot from outside.)

Of course the other side of the equation is, what about the other wing prospects? Most of them project as outside shooters, but are they close to MKG in overall talent? Can they be a strong link in a good team defense?

Robin,
I think MKG will probably see more shot-specific coaching from April until next year than he has ever received in his life. Obviously a big part of my post assumes that a combination of long hours and great coaching can make him a 35% three point shooter. There is precedence, as recently as this year with Kawhi Leonard.

Obviously Cleveland needs to find a floor-stretching big man in the next several years. Developing TT’s range at least out to the elbow would be great.

A lineup of Kyrie, a sharp-shooting 2, 35% MKG, elbow-range TT, and stretch-big can spread the court fine during crunch time.

Everything discussed above “begs” the question-how do/can the Cavs address the obvious need to secure a viable, offensive threat at shooting guard. I can’t, for a minute, imagine the Cavs not spending equal time trying to figure out how to secure another pick in the 8 to 12 range to get the SG they need. The idea of waiting for future draft picks to solve this problem just does not make sense. Do we really think Harris/Gibson will fill the void, or the Cavs can sign a credible free agent. No. They have to get a SG this year along with the SF, likely KG or Barnes. And waiting until the 24th pick won’t get it done. One way or another, they will get another pick in the top 12. They have the assets to do it. The pressure is surely on Grant to negotiate the best deal possible without mortgaging future flexibility.

James, there really is no need to get a shooting gaurd this year. Regardless of what else happens, we aren’t winning a title in 2013, so the urgency isn’t there. We do need to address it in the next year or two, but as much as people think Free Agency is a hopeless cause, Cleveland has lured in some sought after free agents in the past, and we will do so again in the future. The previous ones didn’t work out too well, but other teams were going after those players too. Will we lure Harden level talent? Maybe not, but I’m sure we can get a capable 3 point shooter at the 2 gaurd spot if we have an otherwise talented team and a city on the rise (if you don’t believe me, I take it you haven’t been downtown in the last month.)

Next years draft would work as well, and Doron Lamb or John Jenkins or whoever else is their with the later picks could work out too. The cavs will have to give up a lot to stay at 4 and move up to 12, not worth selling all our future draft picks for, though if one or two would do it, maybe it would be worth it.

The Lineup: (Click for Author’s Archive)

Nate Smith is an Associate Editor. He grew up in Anchorage, Alaska, and moved to NE Ohio in 2000. He adopted the Cavs in 2003 and graduated from Kent State in 2009 with a BA in English. He can be contacted at oldseaminer@gmail.com or @oldseaminer on Twitter.

Tom Pestak is an Associate Editor. He's from the west side of Cleveland and lives and (mostly) dies by the success and (mostly) failures of his beloved teams. You can watch his fanaticism during Cavs games @tompestak.

Robert Attenweiler is a Staff Writer. Originally from OH, he's long made his home in NYC where he writes plays and screenplays (www.disgracedproductions.com) some of which end up being about Ohio, basketball or both. He has also written for The Classical and the blog Raising the Cadavalier. You can contact him at rattenweiler@gmail.com or @cadavalier.

Benjamin Werth is a Staff Writer. He was born in Cleveland and raised in Mentor, OH. He now lives in Germany where he is an opera singer and actor. He can be reached at blfwerth@gmail.com.

Cory Hughey is a Staff Writer. He grew up in Youngstown, the Gary, Indiana of Ohio. He graduated from Youngstown State in 2008 with a worthless telecommunications degree. He can be contacted at theleperfromwatts@yahoo.com or @coryhughey on Twitter.

David Wood is our Links Editor. He is a 2012 Graduate of Syracuse University with an English degree who loves bikes, beer, basketball, writing, and Rimbaud. He can be reached on Twitter: @nothingwood.

Mallory Factor is the voice of Cavs: The Podcast. By day Mallory works in fundraising and by night he runs a music business company. To see his music endeavors check out www.fivetracks.com. Hit him up at Malloryfactorii@gmail.com or @Malfii.

John Krolik is the Editor Emeritus of Cavs: The Blog. At present, he is pursuing a law degree at Tulane University. You can contact him at johnkrolik@gmail.com or @johnkrolik.

Follow Me On Twitter

General NBA

Other Places To Find My Work

The Comment Monster

A monster lives in the comments section of Cavs: The Blog, and he likes to feed on comments. We have very little idea about when he will strike. What we do know is that comments with 2 or more links will get filed into the spam folder, as will comments with foul or discriminatory language. The comment monster also seems to enjoy extra-long comments, so if you have a long comment, you may want to press copy before submitting a long comment and break it into multiple pieces if the monster eats it. If you are having particular trouble with the monster, email one of us and we will talk to him for you.